Angela Rayner Admits Tax Evasion: Refers Herself To Watchdog

It’s common knowledge that people living in the United Kingdom are required to pay tax. The UK tax system is complicated but we have the opportunity to pay tax specialists to make the rules easier for everyday people to understand.

One person you would expect to understand our tax laws is our deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, especially something as basic as stamp duty on her third property investment, a luxury seaside property that cost a staggering £800 thousand.

She utilised a tax avoidance scheme reserved for the ultra-rich in which she removed her name from the deeds of her principal home, squandering this property into a trust with her children as beneficiaries. It’s a fantastic way to avoid inheritance tax and, apparently, stamp duty. One may wonder if she paid any capital gains tax as a result of depriving herself of the asset for financial gain and to avoid tax.

By fraudulently claiming this property to be her main residence, despite the fact she lives in Greater Manchester (which is the opposite end of England to Hove), she expected to con the tax payer (us) our of a whopping £40 thousand; that’s a lengthy jail sentence for us commoners according to the Sentencing Guidelines judges must adhere to when sentencing criminals.

Whilst trusts are a tool available to anyone with the financial means to access them, most of us fail to have these means or the know-how, which makes Rayner’s antics even more surprising. Being a senior politician for a party that is committed to stamping out tax avoidance, where they claim that everyone has a moral responsibility to pay their fair share, it is surprising that senior members of our government fail to behave in a manner that reflects these apparent values.

It is possible, of course, that Angela Rayner was advised by her colleague who pretended to be an economist, blaming her staff for lying on her personal LinkedIn profile and making the claim that she was an economist for the Royal Bank of Scotland. It transpired that Rachel Reeves was in fact a mere retail banker, a cashier, and nothing more.

If we allow politicians to lie about their work history and achievements then it is no wonder other politicians in the same government will lie about what tax they have to pay. Despite this, if you fail to pay every penny of tax, you’ll find yourself hit with charges and interest, a luxury some politicians expect they will avoid.

I think the problem we face is that politicians think that they are above the law. The privilege of governance is one awarded by the people through the votes they cast and what politicians seem to forget is that these privileges only extend for the duration of the term of government.

When we are faced with a party elected on a manifesto that was torn up on the first day of office, to find ourselves in a worse financial position than we were over the fourteen years of the circus we endured under the last Conservative governments, it demonstrates that once again, our government are treating us with contempt and disrespect.

Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has referred herself to Parliament’s standards watchdog after admitting she did not pay the correct amount of stamp duty on the purchase of a second home, her third property.

In a detailed statement, Ms Rayner attempted to explain the circumstances surrounding the property transaction, citing her complex family situation, her 2023 divorce, and the creation of a trust for her son with special educational needs. These, she claimed, were factors in how the property purchase was structured. But while sympathetic in a personal sense, such explanations would never excuse ordinary citizens from their legal obligations. Any of us who attempted to diminish responsibility for underpaying tax with such reasoning would find ourselves quickly dismissed as tax evaders.

Rayner insists she sought legal advice before buying the flat in Hove, advice which she says indicated she was only liable for standard stamp duty. Yet, no documentary evidence of this advice has been submitted, and no details have been offered about who the supposed legal adviser was, raising further questions about the credibility of her defence. Only after media reports exposed the issue did she allegedly seek what she describes as “expert counsel advice”, which confirmed she should indeed have paid the higher rate of duty.

“I deeply regret the error that has been made,” Rayner said, while presenting her referral to the standards commissioner as a gesture of transparency. In truth, it was not voluntary. Public pressure, scrutiny, and the risk of further embarrassment forced her hand.

At Prime Minister’s Questions, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer doubled down on his support for Rayner, telling MPs he was “very proud” to sit alongside her. Such words send a clear message, that integrity standards demanded of the public do not necessarily apply to those at the top of government. By defending his deputy in the Commons, Starmer is either complicit in brushing off what many consider to be tax fraud, or at the very least, willing to tolerate it in his inner circle.

The controversy comes on the same day the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, set the date of her first Budget for 26th November 2025. Reeves insisted the UK economy was “not broken, but not working well enough”, promising reforms to reset priorities. Yet the optics are damning, while ordinary people brace for tax hikes, fines, and penalties if they miss HMRC obligations by even a few pounds, senior Labour figures appear to escape with little more than a public apology. The public cannot help but think that maybe if her colleagues paid the tax they and we are expected to pay then perhaps we would not be in this mess. Instead, the government will punish the common folk with increased tax to cover the cost of financial mismanagement, while ignoring the bountiful billionaire tax evaders who, if they paid a fair rate of tax, would solve all of the UK’s financial woes.

This is not the first time Labour ministers have faced uncomfortable questions about honesty. Reeves herself came under fire earlier this year after it emerged she had exaggerated her credentials, falsely claiming professional experience in the Bank of England that she did not hold. While many employees in the private sector would be dismissed for lying on their CVs, Reeves carried on in post, shielded by party loyalty and political expediency.

With Rayner’s referral now in the hands of the watchdog, the issue is likely to remain politically charged, though her decision to confront the matter may help contain further fallout. It is likely, however, that despite the watchdog’s findings, Angela Rayner will remain in her post just as Rachel Reeves did after she was caught out lying about her qualifications and work experience where, if any of us do the same, we would be immediately dismissed from our role.

This comes after a series of scandals that have already cast doubt on Labour’s pledge to deliver a government of integrity and transparency.

One of the most notable controversies involved Rachel Reeves herself, who faced accusations of dishonesty when it was revealed that parts of her 2024 book had been lifted from other sources without proper attribution. Combined with her earlier exaggeration of professional experience at the Bank of England, the revelations painted a picture of a senior minister who was willing to blur the truth in order to climb the political ladder. While many workers would lose their positions for lying about their CVs, Reeves faced no such consequence and instead went on to become Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Angela Rayner has also been at the centre of repeated questions over her housing and financial arrangements, long before the stamp duty scandal came to light. Media investigations previously raised concerns about the sale of her council house under Right to Buy, where she made a considerable profit, while simultaneously criticising the very scheme she personally benefited from. Opponents argue that this double standard undermines her claims of being a champion for working people.

Sir Keir Starmer has not been immune to criticism either. While presenting himself as the man to restore honesty to British politics, his leadership campaign was built on pledges to maintain Jeremy Corbyn’s left-wing policies, promises he swiftly abandoned once elected. Many within his own party accused him of deliberately misleading members to secure votes, only to tack towards the political centre when it suited his ambitions.

In addition, Labour has faced repeated rows over the selection of parliamentary candidates. Several prospective MPs have been accused of dishonesty, whether through the embellishment of their professional records or through the hiding of past behaviour that later came to light. In many cases, Labour headquarters pressed ahead with endorsements, brushing aside concerns in the rush to consolidate power.

Taken together, these incidents show a troubling pattern. Labour leaders are quick to lecture the public on fairness, integrity, and accountability, yet when their own honesty is called into question, excuses are made and consequences are avoided. The repeated defence of ministers caught out in lies, exaggerations, or financial mismanagement sends a message that there is one rule for politicians and another for everyone else.

These scandals are not confined to Labour’s time in government. During their years in opposition, Labour MPs were no strangers to stretching the truth or bending the rules when it suited them politically.

Angela Rayner herself was often accused of inconsistencies in her personal story, particularly around her living arrangements and property declarations, with critics suggesting she was less than transparent even before the most recent revelations. Likewise, senior Labour figures frequently accused the Conservatives of dishonesty and sleaze, while quietly downplaying or dismissing questionable behaviour within their own ranks.

One high-profile example came during the debate over antisemitism in the Labour Party, which dogged the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn but continued to spill into Starmer’s tenure as opposition leader. Public assurances were made that the issue would be dealt with swiftly and decisively, yet time and again cases were delayed, minimised, or mishandled. The party repeatedly claimed to be rooting out prejudice, while the reality told a very different story.

Starmer himself has also been accused of selective honesty. In his bid for leadership he promised to maintain key Corbyn-era policies such as public ownership of utilities, free movement, and scrapping tuition fees, only to later abandon each commitment without apology. For many party members and voters, this looked like deliberate dishonesty, a case of saying one thing to win power and doing another once that power was secured.

It is worth noting, however, that Labour’s record of dishonesty is mirrored by the Conservatives, who during their long years in power left the public weary of scandal after scandal. From Boris Johnson’s repeated misleading statements during the Partygate saga, to ministers forced to resign over lobbying, expenses, and personal misconduct, the Conservatives hardly set the bar high for truthfulness. Rishi Sunak’s government inherited a party drowning in questions of integrity, with voters increasingly cynical about whether any senior figure in Westminster could be trusted.

When placed side by side, it becomes clear that dishonesty is not the preserve of one party. Labour spent years condemning Conservative sleaze, yet many of its own leading figures are now entangled in similar behaviour. For the public, the difference between red and blue is narrowing, as both parties have become associated with half-truths, broken promises, and double standards.

The picture that emerges is one of a political class that expects accountability from everyone but themselves. While ordinary citizens are punished heavily for tax errors, employment dishonesty, or breaches of conduct, MPs appear to glide past scandals with a carefully worded apology and the unwavering backing of their leaders. Whether under Labour or the Conservatives, the same story repeats, leaving voters with little faith that integrity will ever truly be restored to public life.

The time has come for real change. Britain cannot afford to tolerate a political system that shields dishonest MPs while punishing ordinary people for far less. Every time a politician lies about their taxes, their record, or their conduct, and survives with nothing more than a carefully worded apology, trust in democracy is eroded. If the people are to have faith in politics again, power must be taken out of the hands of party leaders and returned to where it belongs — with the public.

We must introduce binding recall powers that allow voters to remove dishonest or underperforming politicians without waiting for a general election. This should apply to every MP, every member of the House of Lords, and even the Prime Minister. When those in power lie, mislead, or betray the public’s trust, we should have the right to force them out, just as any employer would dismiss a worker for gross misconduct.

No more waiting five years for accountability. No more broken promises that quietly disappear once election season is over. The people should be able to demand honesty and integrity at all times, and to act immediately when those standards are not met. Such reforms would ensure politicians remember who they work for, and would bring an end to the culture of impunity that has allowed scandal after scandal to pass without consequence.

This is not about left or right, Labour or Conservative. It is about fairness, responsibility, and justice. If Britain is truly to be a democracy, it is the people who must hold the power, not a handful of party leaders who protect their friends and discard their enemies. Until we have the ability to remove dishonest politicians at will, we will remain trapped in a cycle of lies, betrayal, and disappointment. The time for excuses is over. The time for accountability is now. The time for action today. You have a voice and it’s time to start using it instead of lying down and letting those we elect walk all over us.